Judicial Notice of Internet Evidence — State Correctional Records Reflecting Inmate’s Risk Classification
Dugas v. Wittrup, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10962 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 30, 2015):
Plaintiff, an inmate currently incarcerated at the Chillicothe Correctional Institution ("CCI"), brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Brian Wittrup, Chief of the Bureau of Classification for the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction ("ODRC"), alleging that defendant was deliberately indifferent to a serious risk of harm to plaintiff's safety in violation of plaintiff's constitutional rights. This matter is now before the Court on plaintiff's Motion for Emergency Filing Pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act's (PLRA) 'Emminent [sic] Danger Doctrine', ECF 2 ("Motion for Temporary Restraining Order") and Motion to Compel, ECF 10. For the reasons that follow, the Motion to Compel is DENIED and it is RECOMMENDED that the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order be DENIED.
I. ODRC CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AND PROTECTIVE CONTROL
The ODRC maintains a classification level [*2] system "that creates a process for the classification of inmates according to their security risk." Response, p. 1 (quoting ODRC Department Policy No. 53-CLS-08). See also ODRC Department Policy No. 53-CLS-08,available at http://www.drc.ohio.gov/web/drc_policies/drc_policies.htm; United States v. Newsome, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150659, at *2-3 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 23, 2014) ("Public records and government documents, including those available from reliable sources on the Internet, are subject to judicial notice."). The assignment of inmates to institutions considers "the needs of the offender, the safety of persons in the institution, and the operational stability of the institution." Id.
Share this article: